Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

rocket_psyence t1_j8kk5ns wrote

Just saw this! Crazy! Glad it isn't WWIII; sad it isn't aliens.

5

mollydunn94 t1_j8kplxr wrote

I like astrophotography, even with software to help stack images, it’s annoying to have these pop up.

27

mia0820 t1_j8ksncz wrote

Just getting back to vermont. Any idea how long these will be visible?

8

DirtyBirdNJ t1_j8kvtp1 wrote

Spectacular shot! Thanks for posting this

4

jacob22c t1_j8l0je9 wrote

Love the idea of spacex finally allowing people living in the country access to high-speed internet, but i do hate that it came to this. Where we have to rely on the petty whims of a megalomaniac billionaire for infrastructure improvements when the government should be doing it.

36

todd_ted t1_j8l0liq wrote

That’s what that was at 634 in Southern Rutland county. I thought it was another UAP but a string of them.

2

yerkah t1_j8lmc0o wrote

Because it's tough to make government efficient by nature when it comes to new telecom infrastructure, even if well-funded. It's an example of the many huge technological leaps throughout American history that were typically made by inventors, engineers, etc. on behalf of a given industry, rather than by state projects. (Of course, there are exceptions.) Telecommunications is no different, going all the way back to the first phone and telegraph lines. VT (and reddit's demographic generally) just often lean left, so the idea of private actors being inherently more effective at making these improvements doesn't ideologically sit well with many.

7

Decweb t1_j8lqz5e wrote

I don't understand the periodic light. Does it have lights that blink? If it was just reflecting sunlight it seems like it would a solid line.

2

SmoothSlavperator t1_j8mny26 wrote

"The Golden Mile" problem. There's a certain "Break even" point with efficiency vs population density involving cost per user to maintain. Pulling numbers out of the air to explain, it comes down to something like the provider having to spend $10k/yr(probably more than that) to run a switches and repeaters and string a line to get Bob, who lives 5 miles away from anyone else, his internet that's only paying in $75 a month. Whereas if you had 100 subscribers all on top of eachother, your marginal cost per subscriber all gets absorbed.

4

AlwaysPackSnacks t1_j8nr9sn wrote

I saw it last night as well. I'm sure given all UFO/Balloon news this spooked some folks who didn't know it was Starlink.

1

TastySnozzberry t1_j8nv50q wrote

The wheels of the government turn slowly. Private industry is and always will be quicker and more efficient due to lower levels of bureaucracy. The government, given all the lobbying and corruption, would go for the lowest bidder to set up the program which would significantly lower the quality of the product/service. Musk may be a megalomaniac billionaire, but is the government really any better with all the corruption and lobbying? Look at all the insider trading they do to get rich. Given all that I would rather rely on private industry and a megalomaniac billionaire.

2

carsenmeckhardt t1_j8ofi2s wrote

Not satellites. This is just where they want you to practice your upper and lowercase letters

3

SemperFuu t1_j8ot8wp wrote

Freedom. Who is providing internet to Ukraine, King Musk. Who is providing internet to parts of the world no government has ever tried to, King Musk. But yeah awful for one few seconds the fly by.

1

thedvlandgod OP t1_j8p39ec wrote

What I find so interesting about this: 1 in 5 Vermonters were born BEFORE the USSR launched Sputnik. A satellite the size of a beach ball, only capable of transmitting radio signals based on temperature fluctuations as it moved through low orbit.

Today I take a photo with my phone, whose charger has more power than the Apollo 11 computer, and send that photo to the 15.3 thousand people who have seen this post via a satellite internet connection. It’s incredible.

It’s incredible in its human achievement. It’s incredible in its horror. In its audacity and bravado and absurdity. The world is changing at an incredible, incredible rate, and we’re both lucky and damned to be part of its incredulous change.

2

meinblown t1_j8p8pgo wrote

Bro it's facts. He said starlink is not to be used for offensive actions and throttled it into unusablity.

Go back to sleeping in your tesla in the hopes that FSD will drive you into your daddy muskibois waiting arms.

0

sparafucile28 t1_j8pg4pk wrote

Noticed them the other night for the first time here in Rochester and was shocked at how prominent they are to the naked eye. It's deeply sad that we've permanently altered our night skies to the whims of a billionaire.

1

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_j8ri20t wrote

The real story is they took actions to prevent the use of the terminals ON drones. Ukraine had been hacking them and mounting them on long range tu-?? soviet era drones so they could have an about infinite range and were attacking airbases inside Russia. They never wanted it to become a weapon. Military coms was one thing but actually making starlink a part of a weapons system was too much. I applaud the stance they have taken.

1

Aperron t1_j8ttena wrote

I actually only recently realized that most people actually think that NASA itself built and operated the hardware that put man on the moon or built the space shuttle, satellites etc.

NASA had only ever operated as sort of a loosely hands on project manager. The actual engineering, production and operation has always been essentially handled by the corporate military industrial complex.

IBM, ITT, Western Electric, Remington Rand, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and all the rest put things into space and landed on the moon. NASA comes up with some napkin bid specs, and coordinates delivery and writes the checks.

2

SemperFuu t1_j8tvhap wrote

Winner winner chicken dinner. Also the military doesn’t build its technology, very few government agencies do. Check out a book called, IBM and the Holocaust, wild af 🤯

1